Cites Nortcliffe and Middletown-- students performed marginally worse with only summative audio feedback than those receiving short written comments.

Refers to other studies. Audio comments-- Ice et al. "They reported extremely high satisfaction levels, improved conveyance of nuance, enhanced learning community interactions and better retention of content. They also found via an analysis of final projects that students had incorporated learning from previous audio comments three times more frequently than from written comments."

Perceptions: better able to follow, made instructor thought processes clear, recognition that encouragement and explanation rather than scolding/ criticism. Students more willing to follow up. Thompson and Lee identified a need for instruction for students on how to follow up.

Aims of the Project

identify issues with Jing functionality

investigate range of approaches taken by tutors to providing feedback

investigate whether different approaches in diff lang/levels and according to student competence

analyze nature of feedback provided in terms of the criteria addressed/depth of feedback related to strengths and weaknesses

evaluate perception of students of the use of the tool

evaluate perception of tutors of the use of the tool.

Research Methodology

blend self-reported and observed evidence: feedback questionnaires/interviews; analysis of the feedback. FL instruction. Deliberately did not provided detailed guidance on how to provide feedback.

Outcomes

Approaches to feedback

Tutor approaches: common to select one paragraph and focus on it. Various approaches: highlighting errors first then starting recording; identifying and and correcting as moving through; correcting before recording, then explaining; showing corrected/uncorrected version side by side. Some tutors group errors in paragraph.

Small number recorded showing whole script-- corrected errors first then provided overview of categories of errors.

Two tutors (german) generic recordings to which students directed if necessary.

Note:

A comparative analysis of all three modes of feedback provided by a sample of 4 tutors on a single assignment was conducted, using the FACT analysis tool [18]. This is an evaluation instrument that indicates the ‘profile’ of a piece of feedback in terms of the depth of a tutor’s comments about the strengths of the work and the depth of the comments focusing on its weaknesses. The results of this exploratory analysis show some differences in the ways in which individual tutors use the three media available to them: annotations on the written script, electronic summary form, and Jing® recording. For example, two of the tutors used Jing® exclusively for correcting every language error within a selected extract, whereas on the written script a number of errors had been indicated only. Another tutor also used Jing® in order to identify content-related strengths, give specific examples of what the student had done well, and explain why these constituted strengths. This level of depth in relation to strengths did not occur within any of the other media in any of the cases examined.

Covers differences by language (German, Sp, etc.)

Tutor response

tutors unanimous-- Jing offered greater depth for fb than written; believed would have more impact on students, would be more personal, one even noted accessibility. tutors also felt students would get the praise portion more. Appreciated 5 minute restriction. 8/9 would recommend Jing

Student response

clearer explanations/improved retention

advantages of multi-sensory approach. Made feel that work valued. Many had revisited "their screencasts."

Conclusion

suggests compelling feedback on effectiveness of feedback. Students felt greater affective engagement. Many tutors have adopted for other uses.

Further Research

"Further research will need to look into the impact of different approaches to the use of Jing® for commenting on students’ work, the efficacy of generic recordings and the feasibility of extending the use of Jing® on a larger scale. Whilst students report that they find the feedback memorable and that they have understood explanations, our study did not seek to obtain objective evidence in the form of a comparison between the impact of written and Jing® feedback on future work. This would also be a productive line of research."